The numbers are shocking and I am sure they will be challenged by the developer. A calculation by Shropshire Council’s tree team suggests that around 644 trees will have been lost during the lengthy seven year saga to develop the site at the rear of Linney House on the banks of the Corve, if the current development of eight homes is given the green light to go ahead. This is a high end estimate. It more likely that only a third of that number will be lost without replanting.

The council’s tree team notes that only an indicative landscape plan for planting replacement trees has been submitted with the latest application. It now up to the developer to flesh out the details of compensatory planting. Even then, I doubt that the full number of trees can be replaced. Not for the first time recently, this raises the question about how developers can be obliged to compensate for loss of biodiversity.

A planning application has been submitted for eight homes in the grounds of Linney House. The scheme is modern in design. That is a radical departure from the previously approved schemes which were uninteresting suburban designs. The scheme also tackles the issue of flooding. Part of the site lies in Flood Zone 2 and the previous application strayed into this. The current applicant plans to reprofile the site to restore the ground to the levels it had prior to the site being quarried lifting all the homes out of the floodplain. A wildlife corridor will be created along the Corve.

This proposal will need to be scrutinised in detail. My provisional view is that this is a far more attractive and feasible scheme than the previous proposals. It is well designed and landscaped. It will add to the character of the area. But it will generate extra traffic. The Linney should be brought into the town centre 20mph zone if this scheme is to proceed.

The new application for three houses at Linney House is proving somewhat troubled (17/00230/FUL). Both the Environment Agency and Shropshire Council’s tree service have objected. They join local objectors, the town council and myself. The tree officer said the application is “retrograde” and is not sustainable. It is also outside the Ludlow’s development boundary as defined in the local plan, SAMDev.

A new but not revised application has been made for three houses and garages at Linney House (17/00230/FUL). The applicant says: “The intention of the application to secure a consent for a further 3-years to facilitate on-going negotiations with the Council to secure an alternative scheme for this sensitive site.”

I don’t think this is the right approach. The developer should either get on with building or submit a completely new application. In any event, this new application must be determined from scratch. In the light of current planning policy, I can’t see any reason for approving it.